From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8618A30649C for ; Tue, 13 Jan 2026 15:58:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768319894; cv=none; b=dC3kNzqzzgzBkeKnWoN8QwecZ0XDN0eLfJG5oiiBEEF3GODzfm3Sz5JX4NWAt8ps4h0Eq0RRrKVQXC/Jt50USt8t1iCkMCjE20Thq+OXcdon6++ktbWUc/83kroIVVu52uSG3baiB7YRTRDGC+t+9dtL4u5UrZpjLPNy5QEYhXA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768319894; c=relaxed/simple; bh=t3FQ3Ft0DA61EoUdrJa6WOkWMjFmHOQN23Zjjbg5Gzg=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Subject:Cc:To:From: References:In-Reply-To; b=RXJOayfqC+qVEZEk3nf0p31FiRxnfSUen/kSerJ3ymeOzMssAjgDOrpkkYOcYT0AkGJ7SuUXuzuRNQ/UeWuFt+mGAyDQAB+/cGfNpqBjLfWPI01y5IC+tuPfaQklaK7A0i56RYfUGdUO5f7XQ8itrNaG42IjXDf8MwIoANtdkZc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=d4S4ZTHn; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="d4S4ZTHn" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C60ADC116C6; Tue, 13 Jan 2026 15:58:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1768319894; bh=t3FQ3Ft0DA61EoUdrJa6WOkWMjFmHOQN23Zjjbg5Gzg=; h=Date:Subject:Cc:To:From:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=d4S4ZTHn++Y7qFLZ5vVFxjqBwPISHS3ds+U7Z1+ioG9BhioCBGIb1BxdM/9+SNjKU 8sV0J0EuSoTMFvzVWk0AhZVkVsGvqynx95lzjQerV6mWVDC0wDmO4QcDubrbej7UFg zgJ1bSQc1nBHQr3oYzeDeEV4xXsuWsFlioIZhetQQUcB7UApAV+CpQxnFv6YqwEJhs QdBFsNW1ZdQaBe9dJRsZlb6CZV0A6QSwwL6ixQxIoMr+gC0Mw3mmCCVGKXXd/knVx8 Gg+feE7n/4FygU3A0rEpURkogjqIqvP4zxBRBcFYESjVU8cY09QqTaxIhPLk/lbnYU 1qf4NRrxgqbfQ== Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 16:58:10 +0100 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] driver core: enforce device_lock for driver_match_device() Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , , , , "Qiu-ji Chen" To: "Gui-Dong Han" From: "Danilo Krummrich" References: <20260113150447.9077-1-hanguidong02@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: On Tue Jan 13, 2026 at 4:55 PM CET, Gui-Dong Han wrote: > The three call sites for driver_match_device() have been stable for > over a decade. With only two sites requiring the lock, and no new > callers anticipated, adding a helper function seems to have limited > value. On the other hand, driver_match_device() and driver_match_device_locked() m= akes things very clear. :)